A grade of B+? I don't think so. I think a C would be a generous grade.
CBS gave the Bears a D and the 49ers an A+. I feel that's more accurate.
What would you rather have:
Glennon, Mitch
Hoyer/Barkley, Thomas
Who wins more games for you, the QB or the DE?
Why do posters think that just because we did like the pick that we didn't want the Bears to pick a QB. Most of us just don't like is the way Pace when to get this guy. None of the QBs in this draft are day one starter. I for one wanted the Bears and Pace to trade down, to get more picks, but
Pace had to trade up giving draft picks the Bears, picks that needed so bad in order to rebuild the team.
Pace just other day said he won't reach for a player and then reached for one big time, giving way too much of our needed drafts picks, in doing so
Wow. The draft has its first stunner on the second overall pick. The Bears traded up one spot and gave up quite a bit to do so. After signing Mike Glennon in free agency, the Bears take a QB with only 13 collegiate starts on his resume. They pass up defensive standouts Solomon Thomas, Jamal Adams, Marshon Lattimore and Jonathan Allen. This leaves the Bears open to some major second-guessing. — Mark Maske
Why do posters think that just because we did like the pick that we didn't want the Bears to pick a QB. Most of use just don't like is the way Pace when to get this guy. None of the QBs in this draft are day one starter. I for one wanted the Bears and Pace to trade down, to get more picks, but
Pace had to trade up giving draft picks the Bears draft picks, picks that needed so bad in order to rebuild the team.
Pace just other day said he won't reach for a player and then reached one big time, giving way too much of our needed drafts picks, in doing so
I'm w/you JJ. I wanted him to trade down and garner more picks also. But he wanted Mitch; and by all accounts multiple teams were calling the Bears, AND SF to trade up to get him.
What I didn't want was a DB at 3, and wasn't overly thrilled at Thomas or Garrett at 3 either b/c they are more tweeners then 5 tech DE's, I was all in for a QB or trade down.
Mitch wasn't even my favorite qb in this draft. BUT I know that Pace and his staff knows more then I do. He's never given me a reason to doubt his drafts, so I'll take this w/a a grain of salt and be okay with it knowing that Pace believes he has his qb of the future. Now it's wait and see.
Now all I can do is hope they trade the 2nd pick to garner more picks.
lol 670 just said this. Speaking of draft day grades looking back at drafts where there was trades: RGII trade year, Trent Richardson got an A, worst grade was Luke Kuechly. Guys giving draft day grades are as bad at it as guys building big boards.
"But if any position is worth overpaying, selling out, or getting robbed for, it's quarterback. This year, the market was so furious that three teams traded up in the first round for a quarterback for the first time in history. In the long run, it will matter not how many assets were required to make the deal. The leverage point is not the trade itself, but two other factors: evaluation of the player and the franchise's capacity to develop him.
In other words, if you like a quarterback, do whatever you can to get him. If you want to get cute -- if you only want one at the exact price you establish and consider yourself disciplined when you shy away from aggressive bids -- you become ...
2. The Cleveland Browns: America's most disciplined losers
The Browns have the first part right: Draft success is largely about the quantity of picks. So it's great that they will have seven more picks in this draft and then five selections (and counting) in the first two rounds of the 2018 draft.
But failing to use any of them on a high(er)-end quarterback will doom them in the short term and midterm. Unless you think the Browns can grow with 2016 third-rounder Cody Kessler or -- gasp -- recent acquisition Brock Osweiler, it's difficult to see how they can move forward while continuing to slow play the position.
lol 670 just said this. Speaking of draft day grades looking back at drafts where there was trades: RGII trade year, Trent Richardson got an A, worst grade was Luke Kuechly. Guys giving draft day grades are as bad at it as guys building big boards.
670 has been solid gold today. Been laughing a lot.
But failing to use any of them on a high(er)-end quarterback will doom them in the short term and midterm. Unless you think the Browns can grow with 2016 third-rounder Cody Kessler or -- gasp -- recent acquisition Brock Osweiler, it's difficult to see how they can move forward while continuing to slow play the position.
They have picked multiple times in the first round, three times deferring to get the higher end player first and to take the "better value" qb w/the latter pick, all busted out of the league. Maybe trading down to build up the team and waiting on qb doesn't work so well afterall. Maybe after trading back so many times, they should have used those picks to trade up and get one of those top qb's to build around instead.
"But if any position is worth overpaying, selling out, or getting robbed for, it's quarterback. This year, the market was so furious that three teams traded up in the first round for a quarterback for the first time in history. In the long run, it will matter not how many assets were required to make the deal. The leverage point is not the trade itself, but two other factors: evaluation of the player and the franchise's capacity to develop him.
In other words, if you like a quarterback, do whatever you can to get him. If you want to get cute -- if you only want one at the exact price you establish and consider yourself disciplined when you shy away from aggressive bids -- you become ...
2. The Cleveland Browns: America's most disciplined losers
The Browns have the first part right: Draft success is largely about the quantity of picks. So it's great that they will have seven more picks in this draft and then five selections (and counting) in the first two rounds of the 2018 draft.
But failing to use any of them on a high(er)-end quarterback will doom them in the short term and midterm. Unless you think the Browns can grow with 2016 third-rounder Cody Kessler or -- gasp -- recent acquisition Brock Osweiler, it's difficult to see how they can move forward while continuing to slow play the position.
The Browns have outsmarted themselves."
Honest to God.... I just don't get it. I consider myself a pretty good strategic planner. For instance... I can plan ahead for when beer is required rather than a Margarita...
But seriously, you could see because of the pick we had and our need to get a real QB that it was what you should do with the #3 pick. You don't get those every year (unless you are the Browns). That part was easy. I didn't know we would actually do it though....
So back to the Browns.... How in God's name do you have such a desperate need for a QB and so much draft capital to work with and yet still not get yourself a top QB? I mean.... it's just ridiculous. Unless they really believe the top guy is further down.... but even then I would have taken him early to be sure I got him. The highest picked QBs are not always the best (but I sure hope it was this year), but with so many picks and a real need for QB, how you don't pick one in the first is hard to understand. Guess they are looking for another high pick next year.